25 Aug Did NATO Violate International Law in Libya? Will the ICC Investigate?
The legality of NATO’s action in Libya seems to me fairly straightforward. I understand that there are some quibbles about whether NATO exceeded its mandate under the UN Security Council Resolutions. But I don’t think there is a very strong case, as a question of jus ad bellum. Then again, the hard left (in the form of Dennis Kucinich) and, more seriously, various African notables plainly disagree.
A COALITION of 200 prominent African scholars, professionals and politicians — including Thabo Mbeki and former government ministers Ronnie Kasrils and Alec Erwin — yesterday accused western nations and the International Criminal Court of “subverting international law” in Libya…..
“Increasingly, we have seen how the UN, especially the Security Council, has been misused to militarise policy, legalise military action and effect regime change,” said University of Johannesburg professor Chris Landsberg. He was speaking at a press briefing in Johannesburg to communicate the group’s open letter to the international community.
“It’s unprecedented for the UN Security Council to outsource military intervention to Nato.”
Prof Landsberg challenged the International Criminal Court to investigate Nato for “violating international law”.
I think the ICC probably does have some very small and thin basis for opening an investigation into NATA, but I don’t think it will. Nor should it.
Response…
First issue: are there limits to S.C. authority [yes, under U.N. arts. 24(2), 25, etc.]
Second, can S.C. delegate responsibility to NATO [why not?]
Third, can regime change arguably fit within the authorization to protect civilians from attacks and threats of attacks [why not? I recall a speech by Qaddafi’s daughter to the effect that if you are not loyal and with us you are our enemy and deserve to die — this amidst attacks on civilians that the ICC should investigate]
Fourth, “legalize military action”? [why, yes, of course]
I don’t think the ICC, even though specifically tasked to do so in s/res/1970, should break the law in order to enforce it. It could use the credibility which actually demonstrating integrity confers.
I think the jus ad bellum is far too important to describe concerns with its compliance as ‘quibbles’. When the activity in question involves dropping high explosive on people, I think it is fair to ask whether NATO conducted its campaign in strict compliance with the UNSCR or not.
The problem is that what is a very important point can get lost in confused argument. The UNSC often calls on alliances or coalitions of the willing. And ‘NATO’ would not be investigated by the ICC but rather individuals of NATO member States.
I think this is a perfect situation for a Goldstone Commission report to be done.
If NATO is in violation so be it. If rebels are in violation so be it. If Gadhafi’s people are in violation so be it. Need to gather the facts first.
I saw yesterday pictures of persons with their hands tied who had been killed (rebels allege Gadhafi’s people did it, but the reporters said they were black Africans who resembled Gadhafi’s mercenaries). A pretty obvious war crime by someone.
I saw yesterday persons who said they had been tortured by Gadhafi’s forces. A pretty obvious war crime.
As to Thabo Mbeki who I met many years ago, the whole North Africa/Sub-Saharan Africa thing is being played out in this war in ways that us non-Africans (or as a Libero-American born of Americans in Liberia – you non-Africans (I am trying a bit of humor)) may not understand all the implications.
Best,
Ben
You will do well to read the views contained in http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2011/08/26/nato-s-libya-war-a-nuremberg-level-crime-1 which states: Since then, America waged direct and proxy premeditated, aggressive wars worldwide, killing millions in East and Central Asia, North and other parts of Africa, the Middle East, and Europe, as well as Central and South America. Arguably they exceed the worst of Nazi and imperial Japanese crimes combined, including genocide, torture mass destruction of nonmilitary related sites, colonization, occupation, plunder and exploitation. Third Reich criminals were hanged for their crimes. America’s remained free to commit greater ones, notably today against Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Palestine, and the ongoing Libya atrocity – a scandalous “supreme international crime against peace,” demanding justice not forthcoming. In fact, US war criminals are considered hostis humani generis – enemies of mankind. War crimes are against the jus gentium – the law of nations. Established international law addressed them, including the UN Charter. It’s unequivocal explaining under what conditions violence and coercion (by one state against another) are justified. Article 2(3) and Article 33(1) require peaceful settlement of international disputes. Article 2(4) prohibits force or its threatened use. And Article 51 allows the “right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack… Read more »
This may be materially irrelevant a question, but topically it fits well with the discussion of legality/illegality of the political processes. The question is this: Since the National Transitional Council has been recognized as the legitimate government of Libya, does or does not this status imply the designated government is legally responsible for the disorder and atrocities around the country? There are numerous reports coming from the field pointing to crimes perpetrated by the “agents of new government” against civilians – such as murders, robberies, rapes, racist hate crimes (against blacks). Who gets the bill for all of those crimes? – now when Gaddafi is off the map of legal considerations. Thank you.